Computer simulation skills training techniques

ABSTRACT

Techniques are disclosed pertaining to determining a level of proficiency of a user at a computer simulation through the use of a plurality of skill assessment tests. Each skill assessment test can test a respective skill for use in the computer simulation. The techniques can also be used to train a user for the computer simulation and/or to determine team composition using roles for use in the computer simulation. In some aspects, skill assessment tests may incorporate multiple iterations in including a first base line iteration and subsequent iterations that differ between user devices. In some embodiments, metrics that are indicative of a level of proficiency of the user can be made with respect to metrics of other users to determine a user&#39;s level of skill with respect to various groups of other users.

CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This present application is a continuation of U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 17/084,368, filed Oct. 29, 2020, entitled “COMPUTER SIMULATIONSKILLS TRAINING TECHNIQUES,” which is herein incorporated by referencein its entirety for all purposes.

BACKGROUND

Computer simulations are widely used for entertainment, education, andtraining purposes. Many computer simulations are competitive whereinusers compete against each other in real time using internetworkedcomputer devices. For example, video games can be competitive computersimulations used for entertainment purposes in the forms of first personshooters, real-time strategy games, driving simulators, role-playinggames, etc. In these computer simulations, users may use computerdevices in the form of PCs, console game platforms, handheld devices,etc. to interact, via a computer network including the internet, withcompeting users.

Competitive computer simulations are becoming increasingly popular andsupport professional competitive tournaments and teams with commensuratemonetary prizes. Thus, computer simulations and users' performance atcomputer simulations are becoming increasingly important to users andspectators alike. However, there are few tools to aid users in becomingmore proficient at competitive computer simulations.

BRIEF SUMMARY

In some embodiments, a system for matching users of a computersimulation by role can comprise: a user device including: a user networkinterface; an input device; a display; and one or more user processorscoupled to the user network interface, the input device, and thedisplay, the one or more processors configured to: generate a pluralityof skill assessment tests wherein each of the plurality of skillassessment tests is configured to test a respective skill for use in acomputer simulation; collect, for each of the plurality of skillassessment tests, metrics for a user while the user interacts with eachof the plurality of skill assessment tests via the input device and thedisplay wherein the metrics are indicative of the user's performance atthe plurality of skill assessment tests; transmit, via the user networkinterface, the metrics; a server device including: a server networkinterface; and one or more server processors coupled to the servernetwork interface, the one or more server processors configured to:receive, via the server network interface, from the user device, themetrics; determine, based on the metrics, and the user's relativeproficiency at each of the plurality of skill assessment tests, asuitable role for the user for the computer simulation; receive, via theserver network interface, a request from the user device, a request forthe user to join a team for an instantiation of the computer simulationwherein the team includes multiple users interacting via the computersimulation; and determine, based on the role of the user, whether theuser should join the team. In some aspects, the determining whether theuser should join the team is based on one or more rules that define anoptimal composition of roles for the team and a comparison of whetherthe role of the user aligns with other users' roles for the team basedon the one or more rules. Determining whether the user should join theteam may be based on a preference set by the user defining a rolecomposition for the team. The determining whether the user should jointhe team can be based on a comparison of a ranking of the user at thecomputer simulation to corresponding rankings of other potential membersof the team.

In certain embodiments, a system for matching users of a computersimulation by role can include: a server device including: a servernetwork interface; and one or more server processors coupled to theserver network interface, the one or more server processors configuredto: receive, from a user device, via the server network interface,metrics indicative of a user's performance at a plurality of skills ofthe computer simulation; determine, based on the metrics, a suitablerole for the user for the computer simulation; receive a request, fromthe user device, a request for the user to join a team for aninstantiation of the computer simulation wherein the team includesmultiple users interacting via the computer simulation; and determine,based on the role of the user, whether the user should join the team. Insome aspects, the suitable role is determined based on a comparison ofthe metrics with corresponding metrics of other users indicative of theother users' performance at the plurality of skills of the computersimulation. The metrics can be determined through a plurality of skillassessment tests performed on a user device or through an analysis ofthe user operating the computer simulation. In some cases, the role isdetermined based on a determination, via analysis of the metrics, thatthe user is proficient at a certain subset of the plurality of skills.In some cases, determining whether the user should join the team isfurther based on a determination that the user has a relative level ofproficiency at the role corresponding to other members of the team'sproficiency at their respective roles. In certain embodiments, therelative levels of proficiency of the user at the role are determined bycomparing, via the metrics, the user's proficiency at a subset of theplurality of skills versus other users' proficiency at the subset of theplurality of skills. In certain implementations, the determination thatthe user has the relative level of proficiency at the role correspondingto the other members of the team's proficiency at their respective rolesincludes: determining that each member of the team has a correspondingrank in their respective role wherein the rank is determined bycomparing the each team member's proficiency at the plurality of skillsto other users of the computer simulation's proficiency at the pluralityof skills.

In further embodiments, a method for matching users of a computersimulation by role comprises: at a server device including a servernetwork interface, receiving, from a user device, via the server networkinterface, metrics indicative of a user's performance at a plurality ofskills of the computer simulation; determining, at the server device,based on the metrics, a suitable role for the user for the computersimulation; receiving, at the server, a request from the user device, arequest for the user to join a team for an instantiation of the computersimulation wherein the team includes multiple users interacting via thecomputer simulation; and determining, at the server, based on the roleof the user, whether the user should join the team. The suitable rolemay be determined based on a comparison of the metrics withcorresponding metrics of other users indicative of the other users'performance at the plurality of skills of the computer simulation. Insome aspects, the metrics are determined through a plurality of skillassessment tests performed on a user device or an analysis of the useroperating the computer simulation. The role can be determined based on adetermination, via analysis of the metrics, that the user is proficientat a certain subset of the plurality of skills. The determining whetherthe user should join the team can be further based on a determinationthat the user has a relative level of proficiency at the rolecorresponding to other members of the team's proficiency at theirrespective roles. In some cases, the relative levels of proficiency ofthe user at the role can be determined by comparing, via the metrics,the user's proficiency at a subset of the plurality of skills versusother users' proficiency at the subset of the plurality of skills. Thedetermination that the user has the relative level of proficiency at therole corresponding to the other members of the team's proficiency attheir respective roles may include: determining that each member of theteam has a corresponding rank in their respective role wherein the rankis determined by comparing the each team member's proficiency at theplurality of skills to other users of the computer simulation'sproficiency at the plurality of skills.

In some embodiments regarding the use of randomized subsequent skilltests, a system for matching proficiencies in network computersimulation can comprise: a user device including: a user networkinterface; an input device; a display; and one or more user processorscoupled to the user network interface, the input device, and thedisplay, the one or more processors configured to: provide a pluralityof skill assessment tests wherein each of the plurality of skillassessment tests is configured to test a respective skill for use in acomputer simulation, wherein: a first iteration of a one of theplurality of skill assessment tests is common for the user device andadditional user devices; a subsequent iteration of the one of theplurality of skill assessment tests is randomized such that theiteration of the one of the plurality of skill assessment tests isdifferent between the user device and the additional user devices;collect, for each of the plurality of skill assessment tests, metricsfor a user while the user interacts with each of the plurality of skillassessment tests via the input device and the display wherein themetrics are indicative of the user's performance at the plurality ofskill assessment tests; transmit, via the user network interface, themetrics; a server device including: a server network interface; and oneor more server processors coupled to the server network interface, theone or more server processors configured to: receive, from the userdevice, the metrics; receive, from the additional user devices,additional metrics indicative of additional users' performance at theplurality of skill assessment tests including the first iteration of theone of the plurality of skill assessment tests and the subsequentiteration of the one of the plurality of skill assessment tests; comparethe metrics from the user device with the additional metrics from theadditional user devices; determine, based on the comparison of themetrics from the user device with the additional metrics from theadditional user devices, data indicative of a level of proficiency ofthe user of the user device at the one of the plurality of skillassessment tests; and transmit, via the server network interface, thedata indicative of the level of proficiency of the user to the userdevice. The metrics can be organized into features, wherein each of thefeatures includes a quantitative value corresponding to one or more ofthe metrics. In some cases, a subset of the features is used todetermine the level of proficiency of the user of the user device at theone of the plurality of skill assessment tests. The subset of featurescan be determined based on a comparison of the metrics for the user atthe one of the plurality of skill assessment tests and correspondingmetrics for other users at the one of the plurality of skill assessmenttests.

In further embodiments, a method of determining proficiency of aplurality of users at a computer simulation can comprise: providing, toeach of the plurality of users via a respective computer device, one ofa plurality of skill assessment tests, wherein: each of the plurality ofskill assessment tests is configured to test a respective skill for usein the computer simulation; a first iteration of the one of theplurality of skill assessment tests is common for each of the pluralityof users; and a subsequent iteration of the one of the plurality ofskill assessment tests is randomized such that the subsequent iterationof the one of the plurality of skill assessment tests is different foreach of the plurality of users but still tests the proficiency of theplurality of users at a skill corresponding to the one of the pluralityof skill assessment tests; collecting, at a server device, metricsindicative of performance of the plurality of users for the firstiteration and the subsequent iteration at the one of the plurality ofskills; and determining, at the service device, a relative proficiencyfor each of the plurality of users at the one of the plurality of skillassessment tests. In some aspects, the plurality of skill assessmenttests are administered to the user via a user device including an inputdevice and a display device. In certain embodiments, the randomizedsubsequent iteration of the one of the plurality of skill assessmenttests includes a rendered object that is randomized with respect to atleast one of a location or a time that the rendered object appears onthe display device.

In further embodiments, an amount of randomization applied to therendered object is selected based on a current level of proficiency ofthe user at the one of the plurality of skills. In some cases, themetrics include data generated corresponding to a status of the inputdevice as the user operates the input device in response to therandomized rendered object. The metrics can be organized into features,wherein each of the features includes a quantitative value correspondingto one or more of the metrics and quantitative values for the featuresare used to determine the level of proficiency of the plurality of usersat the one of the plurality of skill assessment tests instead of all ofthe metrics. Each of the plurality of skill assessment tests can beadministered to the plurality of users as a corresponding first commonbaseline test and a corresponding subsequent randomized test. In certaincases, each of the plurality of skill assessment tests is configured toassess a user's proficiency at a task that is performed as part of thecomputer simulation.

In certain embodiments, a system for determining proficiency of aplurality of users at a computer simulation comprises: a user deviceincluding: a user network interface; and one or more user processorscoupled to the user network interface, the input device, and thedisplay, the one or more processors configured to: provide a pluralityof skill assessment tests wherein each of the plurality of skillassessment tests is configured to test a respective skill for use in thecomputer simulation, wherein: each of the plurality of skill assessmenttests is configured to test a respective skill for use in the computersimulation; a first iteration of the one of the plurality of skillassessment tests is common for each of the plurality of users; and asubsequent iteration of the one of the plurality of skill assessmenttests is randomized such that the subsequent iteration of the one of theplurality of skill assessment tests is different for each of theplurality of users but still tests the proficiency of the plurality ofusers at a skill corresponding to the one of the plurality of skillassessment tests; and a server computer device including one or moreprocessors, the one or more processors configured to: collect metricsindicative of performance of the plurality of users for the firstiteration and the subsequent iteration at the one of the plurality ofskills; and determine a relative proficiency for each of the pluralityof users at the one of the plurality of skill assessment tests. In someimplementations, the user device includes an input device and a displaydevice. The randomized subsequent iteration of the one of the pluralityof skill assessment tests can include a rendered object that israndomized with respect to at least one of a location or a time that therendered object appears on the display device. In some aspects, anamount of randomization applied to the rendered object is selected basedon a current level of proficiency of the user at the one of theplurality of skills. The metrics can include data generatedcorresponding to a status of the input device as the user operates theinput device in response to the randomized rendered object. The metricscan be organized into features, wherein each of the features includes aquantitative value corresponding to one or more of the metrics andquantitative values for the features are used to determine the level ofproficiency of the plurality of users at the one of the plurality ofskill assessment tests instead of all of the metrics. Each of theplurality of skill assessment tests may be administered to the pluralityof users as a corresponding first common baseline test and acorresponding subsequent randomized test. In some cases, each of theplurality of skill assessment tests is configured to assess a user'sproficiency at a task that is performed as part of the computersimulation.

In some embodiments, a system for skills-based simulation game trainingcan comprise: a user device including: a user network interface; aninput device; a display; and one or more user processors coupled to theuser network interface, the input device, and the display, the one ormore processors configured to: generate a plurality of skill assessmenttests wherein each of the plurality of skill assessment tests isconfigured to test a respective skill for use in a computer simulation;collect, for each of the plurality of skill assessment tests, metricsfor a user while the user interacts with each of the plurality of skillassessment tests via the input device and the display wherein themetrics are indicative of the user's performance at the plurality ofskill assessment tests; transmit, via the user network interface, themetrics; a server device including: a server network interface; and oneor more server processors coupled to the server network interface, theone or more server processors configured to: receive, via the servernetwork interface, from the user device, the metrics; receive, via theserver network interface, from additional user devices, additionalmetrics indicative of additional users' performance at the plurality ofskill assessment tests; compare the metrics from the user device withthe additional metrics from the additional user devices; determine,based on the comparison of the metrics from the user device with theadditional metrics from the additional user devices, data indicative ofa level of proficiency of the user of the user device at the computersimulation; and transmit, via the server network interface, the dataindicative of the level of proficiency of the user to the user device.Each of the plurality of skill assessment tests may be configured toassess a user's proficiency at a task that is performed as part of thecomputer simulation.

In some embodiments, a method for determining a proficiency of a user ata computer simulation comprises: providing, to the user, via a usercomputer device including an input interface and a display, a pluralityof skill assessment tests wherein each of the plurality of skillassessment tests is configured to test a respective skill for use in thecomputer simulation; receiving, at a server computer device, from theuser computer device, metrics indicative of the user's performance atthe plurality of skill assessment test; collecting, at the servercomputer, additional metrics indicative of additional users' performanceat the plurality of skill assessment tests wherein each of theadditional users perform the plurality of skill assessment tests at acomputer device; and determining, based on a comparison of the metricsindicative of the user's performance to the additional users' metrics, alevel of proficiency of the user at the computer simulation. In someaspects, the user computer device and the server computer are a samedevice.

In certain embodiments, the computer simulation and the plurality ofskill assessment tests use a same engine to generate content of thecomputer simulation and the plurality of skill assessment tests. Thecomputer simulation can be a network-enabled computer simulation whereinmultiple users compete against each other in real time. The determiningthe level of proficiency of the user at the computer simulation mayinclude comparing a ranking of the user at the computer simulation toranking of other users of the computer simulation, wherein the rankingsare determined through metrics other than metrics indicative of users'performance at the plurality of skill assessment tests. The method canfurther include collecting individual results for the user at each ofthe plurality of skill assessment tests and determining, based on theresults of the user at the each of the plurality of skill assessmenttests, a role suited to the user for the computer simulation. In someaspects, the method further includes displaying, to other users of thecomputer simulation, the role of the user or a representation of theuser's individual results at the each of the plurality of skillassessment tests. In some aspects, the method for determining aproficiency of a user at a computer simulation can further includedisplaying, to the user, a representation of the user's level ofproficiency at the computer simulation based on the comparison of themetrics indicative of the user's performance to the additional users'metrics.

In certain embodiments, a system for determining a proficiency of a userat a computer simulation includes: a user computer device including aninput interface, a display, and one or more user processors, the one ormore user processors configured to: provide, to the user, a plurality ofskill assessment tests wherein each of the plurality of skill assessmenttests is configured to test a respective skill for use in the computersimulation; and a server computer device including one or more serverprocessors, the one or more server processors configured to: receive,from the user computer device, metrics indicative of the user'sperformance at the plurality of skill assessment test; collectadditional metrics indicative of additional users' performance at theplurality of skill assessment tests wherein each of the additional usersperform the plurality of skill assessment tests at a computer device;and determine, based on a comparison of the metrics indicative of theuser's performance to the additional users' metrics, a level ofproficiency of the user at the computer simulation. The user computerdevice and the server computer can be a same device. In some aspects,the computer simulation and the plurality of skill assessment tests canuse a same engine to generate content of the computer simulation and theplurality of skill assessment test. The computer simulation can be anetwork-enabled computer simulation wherein multiple users competeagainst each other in real time. The determining the level ofproficiency of the user at the computer simulation can include comparinga ranking of the user at the computer simulation to ranking of otherusers of the computer simulation, wherein the rankings are determinedthrough metrics other than metrics indicative of users' performance atthe plurality of skill assessment tests. The one or more serverprocessors or the one or more user processors can be configured to:collect individual results for the user at each of the plurality ofskill assessment tests and determine, based on the results of the userat the each of the plurality of skill assessment tests, a role suited tothe user for the computer simulation. The one or more server processorsor the one or more user processors can be configured to display, toother users of the computer simulation, the role of the user, or arepresentation of the user's individual results at the each of theplurality of skill assessment tests. In some aspects, the one or moreserver processors are configured to display, to the user, arepresentation of the user's level of proficiency at the computersimulation based on the comparison of the metrics indicative of theuser's performance to the additional users' metrics.

This summary is not intended to identify key or essential features ofthe claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used in isolationto determine the scope of the claimed subject matter. The subject mattershould be understood by reference to appropriate portions of the entirespecification of this disclosure, any or all drawings, and each claim.

The foregoing, together with other features and examples, will bedescribed in more detail below in the following specification, claims,and accompanying drawings.

The terms and expressions that have been employed are used as terms ofdescription and not of limitation, and there is no intention in the useof such terms and expressions of excluding any equivalents of thefeatures shown and described or portions thereof. It is recognized,however, that various modifications are possible within the scope of thesystems and methods claimed. Thus, it should be understood that,although the present system and methods have been specifically disclosedby examples and optional features, modification and variation of theconcepts herein disclosed should be recognized by those skilled in theart, and that such modifications and variations are considered to bewithin the scope of the systems and methods as defined by the appendedclaims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The features of the various embodiments described above, as well asother features and advantages of certain embodiments of the presentinvention will be more apparent from the following detailed descriptiontaken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 shows a simplified block diagram of a computer device for usewith aspects of the disclosure;

FIG. 2 shows a simplified diagram of internetworked computer devices,such as those shown in FIG. 1, according to certain embodiments;

FIG. 3 shows simplified features regarding skills decomposition betweencomplex and basic skills, according to certain embodiments;

FIG. 4 shows simplified features regarding randomizing iterative skillstests, according to certain embodiments;

FIG. 5 is a simplified flow chart that illustrates features of thedisclosure pertaining to implementing a skills based assessment test todetermine a level of proficiency of a user at a computer simulation;

FIG. 6 is a simplified flow chart showing aspects of a method formatching users of a computer simulation by role, according to certainembodiments; and

FIG. 7 is a simplified flow chart showing aspects of a method fordetermining a proficiency of a plurality of users at a computersimulation, according to certain embodiments.

Throughout the drawings, it should be noted that like reference numbersare typically used to depict the same or similar elements, features, andstructures.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

To provide a high level, broad understanding of some aspects of thepresent disclosure, a non-limiting summary of certain embodiments ispresented here. Techniques are disclosed that relate to automatedsystems for assessing and training skills of users for use incompetitive computer simulations. The techniques generally pertain togenerating multiple skills assessment tests and administering them tothe users. The skill assessment tests can each test a respective skillfor use in the computer simulation. By assessing the user's proficiencyat each of these tests, a user's overall proficiency at the computersimulation can be assessed. Furthermore, a user's relatively strong andweak skills can be identified. Weak skills can be improved upon viaproviding the user with training customized for that user. Additionally,by assessing a user's relative strengths and weaknesses, a role for thecomputer simulation can be determined that the user may be proficientat.

In the following description, for the purpose of explanation, numerousexamples and details are set forth in order to provide an understandingof embodiments of the present invention. It will be evident, however, toone skilled in the art that certain embodiments can be practiced withoutsome of these details, or with modifications or equivalents thereof.

Competitive computer simulations that allow users to compete againsteach other by interacting with corresponding user computer devices arebecoming increasingly popular with users and spectators alike. Manyusers enjoy interacting with such simulations from the privacy of theirhomes, via mobile devices, at tournament settings, etc. As users becomemore connected through the proliferation of network-enabled devices andthe availability of high-speed internet access, these types ofsimulations have seen a marked growth in popularity.

The popularity has driven interest to a point wherein some users make acareer of competing in these simulations through organized tournamentsand similar venues. Thus, these entertainment simulations have becomeincreasingly competitive and users are becoming increasingly consciousof and concerned with their performance at such simulations. Thedisclosed techniques can enable users to increase their level ofproficiency at computer simulations by improving skills needed tocompete in the simulations. The techniques can include separating manycomplex skills needed to engage in computer simulations into moreindividualized and assessable basic skills that are easier to assess andcan be more efficiently improved upon.

Assessing a user's proficiency at the individual skills can be used toassess a user's general proficiency at the computer simulation as wellas their relative strengths and weaknesses as compared to other users ofthe simulation. This can be accomplished by comparing the results of anindividual user's performance at an individual skill assessment test toother users' results. Furthermore, the relative contribution ofindividual skills or combinations of skills can be assessed to determinewhich of the skills indicate, via a causal relationship, a relativelyproficient user of the computer simulation.

An assessment of the relative performance of the user's skills can alsobe used in a team setting wherein a user's proficiency at certain skillscan be combined with the complementary proficiencies of another user.Disclosed techniques can be used to identify which skill combinations ina team indicate a proficient team and match users to form a proficientteam based on the members' respective proficiencies at the skills. Theskill composition can be based on many factors, such as the relativestrengths of the opposing team, a current map used for the simulation,past performance of combinations of players, etc.

The use of the individual assessment tests can take several forms. Forexample, for a first-person shooter, skills tests may include platformjumping, grenade throwing, tracking a moving target, head-shot accuracy,etc. The disclosed techniques include features that prevent users fromartificially inflating their scores through memorization or similartechniques. The skill assessment tests can include relatively simplifiedtasks as compared to the simulation as a whole. The skill assessmenttests can include the generation of multiple targets, platforms, etc. Toprevent a user from memorizing the locations and/or pathing of thesegenerated features, the techniques can include randomizing aspects ofthe skill assessment tests. The amount and types of randomization can beselected to avoid the results of each test from being inconsequential.In other words, if the tests are overly randomized, the results cannotbe compared with previous user results and/or other users' results.Thus, a balance can be maintained to sufficiently randomize the tests toavoid user memorization but still provide statistically significantresults for the tests.

Additional features of the disclosure pertain to improving a user'sproficiency at the computer simulation over time. This can beaccomplished by assessing a user's current proficiency at the simulation(or at a role for the simulation) through the individual skillsassessment tests. An improvement plan can be generated for a userwherein incrementally more difficult challenges can be provided to auser to allow a user to increase their skill proficiencies commensuratewith the increased difficulties. The increased difficulties can includealtering a speed that a generated target moves at, changing a target'spathing routines, decreasing the size of a target, etc. In certainembodiments, the difficulty levels can be bounded into brackets (e.g.,beginner, intermediate, advanced, etc.) to enable test results for auser in a bracket to be compared to other users within the bracket whilealso enabling the user to advance in proficiency. In some aspects,challenges can be presented as challenges with three levels ofdifficulty, or as a continuum of difficulty levels for each user with anAI coach where models provide features (e.g., weak, moderate, strong)and custom difficulty levels to best accommodate a particular user'sneeds for specific and overall improvements in performance.

In some embodiments, score-based kills assessment tests can beaggregated in any suitable manner and may include all or some gameplayactions during all or some time during the skills assessment tests. Insuch cases, machine learning subroutines, game expertise, anddifferences between a corresponding amateur and professional users canbe used to generate features and their relative weights. The computedweights can be used to generate a score for each skill that can includea local score, global score, or any suitable population of users.

More specifically, systems that operate the computer simulation can usea scoring system to reflect the performance of the user at each skill. Acombination of multiple metrics can be used to produce a score assignedto each skill. These metrics may be identified as the representatives ofthe user performance, as they can be used to distinguish the amateurlevel community of the users from the professional players. Theimportance of each metric in the score can then be determined, forexample, by maximizing the standard deviation of the scores distributionof all the users. A global score can represent the overall performanceof the user and may be calculated by multiplying the individual skillscores.

Definitions

The present disclosure may be better understood in view of the followingexplanations:

As used herein, the term “computer simulation” refers to a visual,immersive computer-simulated environment provided to a user. A presenceof a user in this environment may be simulated by enabling the user tointeract with the setting and objects depicted therein. The user'srepresentation in the environment can be known as an avatar. Examples ofcomputer simulations may include: a video game; a medical proceduresimulation program including a surgical or physiotherapy procedure; aninteractive digital mock-up of a designed feature, including a computeraided design; an educational simulation program, including an e-learningsimulation; or other like simulation. The simulated environment may betwo- or three-dimensional. Computer simulations may or may not becompetitive wherein users of the computer simulation compete with oneanother in real time via a scoring or objective system. A networkedcomputer infrastructure can enable users to access the computersimulation in real time while being geographically dispersed.

As used herein, the term “display device” means an electronic devicethat generates optical light that can be viewed by a user. Displaydevices can be used by a user of the computer simulation to interactwith the simulated environment. The devices may also be used to viewinformation indicative of a user's performance at the computersimulation. Examples of display devices include computer monitors,televisions, smartphone screens, tablet computer screen, augmented orvirtual reality headsets, etc.

As used herein, the term “rendered images” or “graphical images” mayinclude images that may be generated by a computer and displayed, via adisplay device, to a user as part of computer simulation. Examples ofrendered images can include a user avatar (or an opponent's avatar), aweapon, a crate, a vehicle, etc. A rendered image can include or may beuser-readable text. The images may be displayed in two or threedimensions.

As used herein, the term “head mounted display” or “HMD” may refer to adisplay to render images to a user. The HMD may include a graphicaldisplay that is supported in front of part or all of a field of view ofa user. The display can include transparent, semi-transparent ornon-transparent displays. The HMD may be part of a headset. Thegraphical display of the HMD may be controlled by a display driver,which may include circuitry as defined herein.

As used herein, the term “skill” means an ability to perform an actionwith determined results within a given amount of time, energy, or both.The actions, as differentiated from more general testing to determine auser's general abilities, are specific actions performed by a user of acomputer simulation. Skills, as used herein, require physical inputsfrom a user, generally via a user interface device and thus can include,for example, cognitive skills, perceptual skills, affective skills, andso-called muscle memory. The skills are generally therefore not only auser's ability to mentally assess a situation, but an ability to assessand react within bounds of the computer simulation. Skills can bedifferentiated between complex skills and basic skills. Complex skillscan include a plurality of basic skills.

As used herein, the term “metric” means a value of data that is recordedor derived from data recorded by a user when interacting with a computersimulation or a skill assessment test. Metrics can include raw data(e.g., unprocessed data that is collected when a user is interacting) orfeatures which are processed data values based on values of the rawdata.

As used herein, the term “software engine” means a set of computerinstructions or tools used to generate a computer simulation. A softwareengine can include a rendering engine for rendering graphics in acertain way. A software engine may also include an input engine, aphysics engine, etc. Two computer simulations or similar softwareconstructs generated using the same software engine may have similarappearances, responses to user inputs, etc.

As used herein, the term “electrical circuitry” or “circuitry” may referto, be part of, or include one or more of the following or othersuitable hardware or software components: a processor (shared,dedicated, or group), a memory (shared, dedicated, or group), acombinational logic circuit, a passive electrical component, or aninterface. In certain embodiments, the circuitry may include one or morevirtual machines that can provide the described functionality. Incertain embodiments, the circuitry may include passive components, e.g.,combinations of transistors, transformers, resistors, or capacitors thatmay provide the described functionality. In certain embodiments, thecircuitry may be implemented using, or functions associated with thecircuitry may be implemented using, one or more software or firmwaremodules. In some embodiments, circuitry may include logic, at leastpartially operable in hardware. The electrical circuitry may becentralized or distributed, including being distributed on variousdevices that form part of or are in communication with the system andmay include: a networked-based computer, including a remote server; acloud-based computer, including a server system; or a peripheral device.

As used herein, the term “processor(s)” or “host/local processor(s)” or“processing resource(s)” may refer to one or more units for processingincluding an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), centralprocessing unit (CPU), graphics processing unit (GPU), programmablelogic device (PLD), microcontroller, field programmable gate array(FPGA), microprocessor, digital signal processor (DSP), or othersuitable component. A processor can be configured using machine readableinstructions stored on a memory. The processor may be centralized ordistributed, including distributed on various devices that form part ofor are in communication with the system and may include: anetworked-based computer, including a remote server; a cloud-basedcomputer, including a server system; or a peripheral device. Theprocessor may be arranged in one or more of: a peripheral device (e.g.,a stylus device), which may include a user interface device and/or anHMD; a computer (e.g., a personal computer or like device); or otherdevice in communication with a computer system.

As used herein, the term “computer readable medium/media” includesconventional non-transient memory, for example, random access memory(RAM), an optical media, a hard drive, a flash drive, a memory card, afloppy disk, an optical drive, and/or combinations thereof. It is to beunderstood that while one or more memories may be located in the samephysical location as the system, the one or more memories may be locatedremotely from the host system, and may communicate with the one or moreprocessors via a computer network. Additionally, when more than onememory is used, a first memory may be located in the same physicallocation as the host system and additional memories may be located in aremote physical location from the host system. The physical location(s)of the one or more memories may be varied. Additionally, one or morememories may be implemented as a “cloud memory” (i.e., one or morememories may be partially or completely based on or accessed using thenetwork).

As used herein, the term “communication resources” refers to hardwareand/or firmware for electronic information transfer. Wirelesscommunication resources may include hardware to transmit and receivesignals by radio, and may include various protocol implementations,e.g., 802.11 standards described in the Institute of ElectronicsEngineers (IEEE), Bluetooth™, ZigBee, Z-Wave, Infra-Red (IR), RF, or thelike. Wired communication resources may include a modulated signalpassed through a signal line; said modulation may accord to a serialprotocol such as, for example, a Universal Serial Bus (USB) protocol,serial peripheral interface (SPI), inter-integrated circuit (I2C),RS-232, RS-485, or other protocol implementations.

As used herein, the term “network” or “computer network” means aplurality of distinct computer devices that communicate with one anotherelectronically. Networks may include one or more networks of any type,including a Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN), a telephone network(e.g., a Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) and/or a wirelessnetwork), a local area network (LAN), a metropolitan area network (MAN),a wide area network (WAN), an Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem(IMS) network, a private network, the Internet, an intranet, anothertype of suitable network, and/or combinations thereof.

As used herein, the term “sensor system” refers to a system operable toprovide position information concerning interface devices, peripherals,and other objects in a physical world that may include a body part orother object. The term “tracking system” may refer to detecting movementof such objects. The body part may include an arm, leg, torso, or subsetthereof including a hand or digit (finger or thumb). The body part mayinclude the head of a user. The sensor system may provide positioninformation from which a direction of gaze and/or field of view of auser can be determined. The object may include a peripheral deviceinteracting with the system. The sensor system may provide a real-timestream of position information. In an embodiment, an image stream can beprovided, which may represent an avatar of a user. The sensor systemand/or tracking system may include one or more of a: camera system; amagnetic field-based system; capacitive sensors; radar;acoustically-based tracking systems; other suitable sensorconfiguration; optical, radio, magnetic, and inertial technologies, suchas lighthouses, ultrasonic, IR/LEDs, SLAM tracking; light detection andranging (LIDAR) tracking; ultra-wideband tracking; and other suitabletechnologies as understood to one skilled in the art. The sensor systemmay be arranged on one or more of: a peripheral device, which mayinclude a user interface device, the HMD; a computer (e.g., a P.C.,system controller or like device); or other device in communication withthe system.

As used herein, the term “user interface device” includes variousdevices to interface a user with a computer, examples of which include:pointing devices including those based on motion of a physical device,such as a mouse, trackball, joystick, keyboard, gamepad, steering wheel,paddle, yoke (control column for an aircraft), a directional pad,throttle quadrant, pedals, light gun, or button; pointing devices basedon touching or being in proximity to a surface, such as a stylus,touchpad or touch screen; a 3D motion controller, or other suitable userinterface device, as would be appreciated by one of ordinary skill inthe art with the benefit of this disclosure. The user interface devicemay include one or more input elements. In certain embodiments, the userinterface device may include devices intended to be worn by the user.Worn may refer to the user interface device supported by the user bymeans other than grasping of the hands. In many of the embodimentsdescribed herein, the user interface device is a stylus-type device foruse in an AR/VR environment.

As used herein, the term “keyboard” refers to an alphanumeric keyboard,emoji keyboard, graphics menu, or any other collection of characters,symbols or graphic elements. A keyboard can be a real world mechanicalkeyboard, or a touchpad keyboard such as a smart phone or tablet OnScreen Keyboard (OSK). Alternatively, the keyboard can be a virtualkeyboard displayed in an AR/MR/VR environment.

Operating Environment—Computer Device

FIG. 1 and the corresponding discussion are intended to provide ageneral description of a suitable operating environment in which theaspects of the disclosure may be implemented. One skilled in the artwill appreciate that the disclosure may be practiced by one or morecomputing devices and in a variety of system configurations, including anetworked configuration.

Certain embodiments of the present invention may embrace one or morecomputer readable media, wherein each medium may be configured toinclude or includes thereon data or computer executable instructions formanipulating data. The computer executable instructions can include datastructures, objects, programs, routines, or other program modules thatmay be accessed by a processing system, such as one associated with ageneral-purpose computer capable of performing various differentfunctions or one associated with a special-purpose computer capable ofperforming a limited number of functions. Computer executableinstructions can configure a processing system to perform a particularfunction or group of functions. Furthermore, a particular sequence ofthe executable instructions provides an example of corresponding actsthat may be used to implement such steps. Examples of computer readablemedia include random-access memory (“RAM”), read-only memory (“ROM”),programmable read-only memory (“PROM”), erasable programmable read-onlymemory (“EPROM”), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory(“EEPROM”), compact disk read-only memory (“CD-ROM”), or any otherdevice or component that is capable of providing data or executableinstructions that may be accessed by a processing system.

With reference to FIG. 1, a representative system for implementing theinvention includes computer device 10, which may be a general-purpose orspecial-purpose computer. For example, computer device 10 may be apersonal computer, a notebook computer, a personal digital assistant(“PDA”), a smart phone, or other hand-held device, a workstation, aminicomputer, a mainframe, a supercomputer, a multi-processor system, anetwork computer, a processor-based consumer electronic device, an HMD,or the like.

Computer device 10 includes system bus 12, which may be configured toconnect various components thereof and enables data to be exchangedbetween two or more components. System bus 12 may include one of avariety of bus structures including a memory bus or memory controller, aperipheral bus, or a local bus that uses any of a variety of busarchitectures. Typical components connected by system bus 12 includeprocessing system 14 and memory 16. Other components may include one ormore mass storage device interfaces 18, input interfaces 20, outputinterfaces 22, and/or network interfaces 24, each of which will bediscussed below.

Processing system 14 includes one or more processors, such as a centralprocessor and optionally one or more other processors designed toperform a particular function or task. It is typically processing system14 that executes the instructions provided on computer readable media,such as on memory 16, a magnetic hard disk, a removable magnetic disk, amagnetic cassette, or an optical disk, or from a communicationconnection, which may also be viewed as a computer readable medium.

Memory 16 includes one or more computer readable media that may beconfigured to include or includes thereon data or instructions formanipulating data, and may be accessed by processing system 14 throughsystem bus 12. Memory 16 may include, for example, ROM 28, used topermanently store information, and/or RAM 30, used to temporarily storeinformation. ROM 28 may include a basic input/output system (“BIOS”)having one or more routines that are used to establish communication,such as during start-up of computer device 10. RAM 30 may include one ormore program modules, such as one or more operating systems, applicationprograms, and/or program data.

One or more mass storage device interfaces 18 may be used to connect oneor more mass storage devices 26 to system bus 12. The mass storagedevices 26 may be incorporated into or may be peripheral to computerdevice 10 and allow computer device 10 to retain large amounts of data.Optionally, one or more of the mass storage devices 26 may be removablefrom computer device 10. Examples of mass storage devices include harddisk drives, magnetic disk drives, tape drives and optical disk drives.A mass storage device 26 may read from and/or write to a magnetic harddisk, a removable magnetic disk, a magnetic cassette, an optical disk,or another computer readable medium. Mass storage devices 26 and theircorresponding computer readable media provide nonvolatile storage ofdata and/or executable instructions that may include one or more programmodules such as an operating system, one or more application programs,other program modules, or program data. Such executable instructions areexamples of program code means for implementing steps for methodsdisclosed herein.

One or more input interfaces 20 may be employed to enable a user toenter data and/or instructions to computer device 10 through one or morecorresponding input devices 32. Examples of such input devices include akeyboard and alternate input devices, such as a mouse, trackball, lightpen, stylus, or other pointing device, a microphone, a joystick, a gamepad, a satellite dish, a scanner, a camcorder, a digital camera, and thelike. Similarly, examples of input interfaces 20 that may be used toconnect the input devices 32 to the system bus 12 include a serial port,a parallel port, a game port, a universal serial bus (“USB”), a firewire(IEEE 1394), or another interface.

One or more output interfaces 22 may be employed to connect one or morecorresponding output devices 34 to system bus 12. Examples of outputdevices include a monitor or display screen, a speaker, a printer, andthe like. A particular output device 34 may be integrated with orperipheral to computer device 10. Examples of output interfaces includea video adapter, an audio adapter, a parallel port, and the like.

One or more network interfaces 24 enable computer device 10 to exchangeinformation with one or more other local or remote computer devices,illustrated as computer devices 36, via a network 38 that may includehardwired and/or wireless links. Examples of network interfaces includea network adapter for connection to a local area network (“LAN”) or amodem, wireless link, or other adapter for connection to a wide areanetwork (“WAN”), such as the Internet. The network interface 24 may beincorporated with or peripheral to computer device 10. In a networkedsystem, accessible program modules or portions thereof may be stored ina remote memory storage device. Furthermore, in a networked systemcomputer device 10 may participate in a distributed computingenvironment, where functions or tasks are performed by a plurality ofnetworked computer devices.

Operating Environment—Computer Network

Reference is next made to FIG. 2, which illustrates a network schematicview of a distributed computer architecture suitable for effectuatingcertain embodiments of the present invention, designated generally as200. Various components of the illustrated system will be furtherdescribed for purposes of reference to aspects of the present invention.It will be appreciated that embodiments of the present invention may beutilized with other computer network architectures such as peer-to-peerbased systems. The illustrated system 200 includes a local computer userinterface system 210, a server computer system 250, and a remote clientsystem 270. The systems 210, 250, 270 can be coupled via the internet240 acting as a data transmission system. They may also be coupled via alocal network, WAN, LAN, or other network arrangement. Variouscomponents may be further distributed or geographically consolidated forpurposes of utilizing hardware and/or data coupling resources.

The local computer user interface system 210 can include a video router(not shown), a control module (not shown), a local laptop client 232, alocal PC client 234, a user interface device 212, a display device 214,and a local network router 236. A user may interact with local PC client234 via user interface device 212 to interact with a computer simulationdisplayed on display device 214. A user may also interact with otheruser computer devices, such as local laptop client 232, smartphone,gaming console, tablet computer, or the like. The user computer devicemay include client software included therein to support the user'sinteractions with the computer simulation (e.g., via a locally runninginstance of a software engine) and/or to implement aspects of thedisclosure. For example, a user computer device may be used to generateor otherwise provide skills assessment tests to the user. A usercomputer device may collect various pieces of data pertaining to auser's performance at the skills assessment tests and communicate saiddata to server computer system 250. The data may include “raw” datawhich includes values of data recorded directly from a user'sinteraction with a user computer device. The raw data may be furtherprocessed into “features.” The features may be combinations ortransformations of raw data into a form that can be used to assess auser's proficiency at the skill assessment test and/or computersimulation in general. Raw data and/or features may be transmitted to aserver computer as will be further disclosed herein.

User interface device 212 (which may be a keyboard, mouse, gamepad,touchscreen, etc.) may be used to enable a user to interact with theuser computer device. As will be disclosed herein, local network router236 can be used to enable a user interface device to interact with otheruser computer devices via the internet 240, for example. It should beunderstood that local network router 236 is a non-limiting example of anetwork device that enables a user computer device to communicate withother user computer devices. Other examples can include cellular towers,access points, wired or wireless routers, hubs, or switches, etc.

User interface system 210 can be coupled server computer system 250 viainternet 240. Server computer system 250 can include database server254, and a server 252. Database server 254 may be configured to storedata sets from one or more user computer devices, such as local PCclient 234, such as associated raw data values, features data values,authentication information, user account information, etc. Server 252can be configured to analyze, according to one or more rules, datastored on database server 254. Through the analysis of the data sets ofmultiple users performing corresponding skills assessment tests for acomputer simulation, server 252 may quantitatively determine anindividual user's relative level of proficiency at a computer simulationand/or at one or more individual skills for the computer simulation.

Server 252, or a like device, may be configured to facilitate a computersimulation in conjunction with user computer devices. For example, eachuser computer device may run client software wherein images are renderedand displayed to a user, via a display device, and input received fromthe user via a user interface device. The client software may interactwith server-side software that collects certain data to enable multipleinstances of client software to interact to form a multi-user-enabledcomputer simulation. In this simulation, users may compete against oneanother to perform certain goals. For example, the computer simulationmay be a video game, such as a first-person shooter, strategy game,racing simulation, etc., wherein users compete on score, times,achieving objectives, etc. It should be understood that client softwaremay not be required for implementing features of the disclosure if, forexample, the simulation is processed substantially on one or more servercomputer devices that may stream data to user devices. It should also beunderstood that the disclosed features that enable the multi-usercomputer simulation and skills test generation and assessment may beperformed on any number of user devices or server devices in anycombination.

Interface 256 is provided as a visual representation of an interfacethat may be accessible to a user to access and assess certainfunctionalities of the disclosure pertaining to skill assessment.Interface 256 may be a graphical user interface or other that may be runon a server computer or user device. Through interface 256, a user maybe able to:

-   -   1. Assess his/her proficiency at one or more computer        simulations;    -   2. Determine his/her proficiency at one or more skills        pertaining to one or more computer simulations;    -   3. Ingest a generated proficiency improvement plan for one or        more skills;    -   4. Determine a suitability for a role at a certain computer        simulation;    -   5. Assess or ingest suitable teammates that complement a user's        skill set for a computer simulation; or    -   6. Set preferences related to any of the preceding (e.g., a        desired team composition).

In certain embodiments, a user's proficiency at a computer simulationcan be determined based on an evaluation of the user's performance at aplurality of skill assessment tests. A user may use user interface 256to assess his/her individual proficiency which may be representednumerically as a ranking or score and/or qualitatively as beginner,intermediate, and expert, for example. Techniques for determining theproficiency of a user will be disclosed in greater detail herein. Insome aspects, the UI (e.g., dashboard) may provide for a user to comparethemselves with members of the gaming community, professionals, or toshare their own results on social media platforms.

Interface 256 may be used to determine a user's proficiency at one ormore skills. The skills may include, for example, accurate strafing,grenade throwing, strafing, head shot or target proficiency, gearshifting timing, tight turns or racing line proficiency, drafting,drifting, build order, object placement, etc. The relative level ofproficiency of the user at these skills may be presented quantitativelyor qualitatively and may be presented as a spider or radar plot, a barchart, or other suitable representation. These skill proficiencies maybe used to determine a suitable role for a user at a computersimulation. For example, if a user is relatively good at headshots butrelatively bad at strafing and jumping, this may indicate that a usermay be better suited for a sniper role at a first-person shooter than amelee role. Role suggestions and/or suitability scores may be presentedto a user.

Interface 256 may be used to access a skill improvement plan for a user.For example, a relative proficiency of a user may be determined for oneor more skills using skill assessment tests. The skill assessment testsmay be provided to a user iteratively over time so that a user may gainproficiency at a skill that the corresponding tests assess. A user mayprovide certain criteria for a skill improvement plan, such as an amountof time, a period between tests, lengths of tests, a goal level ofproficiency, etc., and/or a computer device may automatically generate asuggested skill improvement plan. This plan may be displayed to a uservia interface 256 and may include an indication of notional improvementto the skill if the user performs the skill assessment tests. Forexample, a graph can be shown illustrating improvement to one or moreskills of a user if the iterative skills assessment tests are performed.Results of the iterative skill assessment tests can be collected andcompared to the expected improvements of the user to track progress. Theskill assessment tests may also be modified over time (e.g., a level ofdifficulty increased) to be commensurate with the proficiency of theuser. For example, a user's proficiency may outgrow a relatively easytest and thus the test may be modified over time to make the test moredifficult and challenge the user to increase the user's proficiency atthe skill(s) needed for the test.

Interface 256 may be used to aid in role-based team formation. Forexample, a suitable role for a user may be assessed through the use ofthe skill assessment tests as disclosed herein. An optimal teamcomposition for a certain computer simulation (and/or for a certainiteration of a computer simulation) may be determined as disclosedherein and/or selected via user preferences. For example, a first-personshooter simulation may operate by having two opposing five-member teamsface off against each other. An optimal team composition may bedetermined to include two strafers, a camper, a sniper, and a medic, orinstance. A user may compare their suitability for a role (camper, forexample), and match this suitability with other users who havecomplementary role suitability. These users may be matched, as a team,for a computer simulation iteration or suitable users may be presentedwith identifications of users with complementary roles so that the usermay add them to a “friends” list or similar grouping and form teams asdesired.

The team composition may also be influenced by respective overallproficiencies of users at the computer simulation. For example, anextremely proficient user may be prevented from being matched with anovice user to avoid an unbalanced or unpleasant computer simulationexperience. Another example is that a relatively more experienced usermay be matched with a less experienced user to enable the lessexperienced user to enhance their skills or learn a new skill set. Theseoptions may be changed based on user preferences.

Remote client system 270 can include a remote client PC 274 and a remoteclient handheld 272, both communicatively coupled to internet 240.Remote clients 272, 274 are examples of users/clients configured todisplay interface 256 to facilitate interaction with aspects of theskills assessment techniques disclosed herein. Various other types ofremote client devices may also act as users/clients, including but notlimited, to computers, phones, cameras, and other electronic devicescoupled to internet 240 via any type of data connection. Wirelessinterface 276 is included as an example of a non-wired interface toallow a computer device to access internet 240 (or similar networks) toenable features of the disclosure. Remote clients 272, 274 may alsointerface with the server 252 or additional modules for purposes ofauthentication, data routing, electronic payment, management, etc.Remote clients 272, 274 may be coupled to internet 240 utilizing variouswell known connection schemes including, but not limited to, cellularphone data networks, local computing data networks, etc. Remote clients272, 274 may interact with and/or receive the interface 256 through aninternet web browser or directly through a particular local softwaremodule configured to access interface 256.

Skill Decomposition

FIG. 3 illustrates a graphical representation 300 of skill decompositionto illustrate certain aspects of the disclosure. Illustrated is acomputer simulation display 302 whereupon is rendered a notionalcomputer simulation. The computer simulation may be presented to a uservia a user computer device, such as local PC client 234 and interactedwith via user interface device 212. In practice, multiple users mayinteract with the computer simulation via a respective user computerdevice. The interactions may be in real time and may be enabled by anetwork, such as internet 240.

The notional simulation includes several targets 312 and a platform 310with non-continuous gaps 314. For example purposes, such a simulationmay include a user's avatar (not illustrated) that traverses platform310 (while jumping over gaps 314) and eliminates targets 312. Presentinga complex computer simulation that requires multiple skills to be usedconjunctively presents many challenges when attempting to assess andimprove upon a user's level of proficiency at the computer simulation.For example, a user's kill or kill/death ratio may be used as anindicator of proficiency, but it may be difficult to determine why auser is proficient when a certain kill count or kill/death ratio isobtained, much less what skills a user may need improvement on or thatthey already excel at. For example, the user may be a skilled sniper whoperforms well on maps that are sniper-friendly and the user maypurposely only select such maps to compete upon. In a team setting, theuser may not be so proficient on other maps which may not be readilyapparent if only observing a kill/death ratio, for example.

Using the disclosed techniques, a user's proficiency at several basicskills can be assessed and improved upon. This allows a user'sproficiency at a computer simulation to be better assessed. For example,the techniques can be used to determine what skills are indicative of aproficient user of a computer simulation. Some skills may be determinedto be of less importance than others. In certain embodiments, aproportion of skills can be determined that, when aggregated, can beindicative of a proficient user. For example, a highly proficient user(or a certain role for a user) may be determined to be composed of a 30%accuracy skill, 20% jumping skill, and a 50% strafing skill. Thisinformation can be used to tailor training plans or assess userproficiency, for example.

Furthermore, the skill proficiency information can be used to determineoptimal team compositions. Such information may be difficult orimpossible to determine having only a single user's “score” at asimulation (e.g., kill/death ratio). Determining which skills arecomplementary can be used to estimate and improve upon a level ofproficiency of a team instead of an individual user. For example, asuitable role for a certain teammate can be determined and/or a trainingregime tailored for that individual to better contribute to theproficiency of the team. For example, it may be determined that aspecific team is lacking a suitably proficient sniper. Using thedisclosed techniques, a certain user may be trained to perform better asa sniper for the user's team which may come at the expense of the user'sindividual computer simulation performance (e.g., when not on the team).

Illustrated in FIG. 3 is a graphical representation of a decompositionof complex skills as illustrated on computer simulation display 302 intoseveral basic skills illustrated by pathing display 304, shootingdisplay 306, and jumping display 308. Each of displays 304, 306, and 308can be presented by a display device and interacted with by a user usinga user interface device. Each of displays 304, 306, and 308 can bedisplayed to a user over various time periods via a respective skillsassessment test.

Pathing display 304 can, for example, illustrate platform 311 that cancorrelate to platform 310. As shown, platform 311 can be followed by anavatar (not illustrated) of a user to assess the user's ability totraverse platform 311 in the absence of other skills needed for theoverall computer simulation. In other words, skills needed fortraversing platform 310 are isolated from gap 314 jumping skills orskills for shooting targets 312. This isolation of platform 311traversal is an example of a skill assessment test wherein the skill ofthe user's ability to traverse platform 311 is assessed. A test can bepresented, as illustrated by pathing display 304, that may change overmultiple iterations of the skill assessment test. For example, platform311 may be generated with more or more extreme turns or it may scrollacross the screen with increasing speed. Thus, a pathing skillassessment test may be made more or less difficult.

The pathing skill assessment test may be made more or less difficult to,for example, implement a training regimen for a user as disclosed hereinand/or to tailor the difficulty of the test to match a proficiency of auser. The proficiency may be selected by the user or assessed viahis/her relative performance at a computer simulation or baseline skillassessment test(s). If a test's difficulty is too low for a certainuser, then metrics collected while the user is performing the test maynot be viable for determining the user's level of proficiency. This isbecause the user may excel at the test and the results may not bestatistically significant because there may not be enough variation frommetrics that represent an ideal proficiency. This may be amplified,especially if metrics are being used for multiple users that are used,in totality, to determine an individual user's level of proficiency at askill or computer simulation.

Shooting display 306 and jumping display 308 show corresponding skillassessment tests for shooting and jumping respectively. In shootingdisplay, targets 313 are illustrated as being rendered on shootingdisplay 306. In this test, a user's avatar (not illustrated) may bepresented with targets that can shoot (using a crosshair directed by acomputer interface device, for example). The targets can be decreased insize, a pathing of a target can be adjusted (speed and/or number ofturns), a number of targets present simultaneously can be adjusted, acolor of target 313 changed, etc., to modify a level of difficultypresented via shooting display 306 and a corresponding skill assessmenttest. Targets 313 can correspond to targets 312 and gaps 315 of jumpingdisplay 308 can correspond to gaps 314. In jumping display 308, a skillassessment test is illustrated to determine a user's proficiency atjumping over gaps 315. An avatar (not shown) may be directed via a userinterface device to jump across gaps 315. Gaps 315 may be changed withrespect to length, frequency, and/or difference in heights betweenledges, for example, to modify a difficulty of the corresponding jumpingskill assessment test. It should be noted that although the variousexamples are shown in a particular representation (e.g., 2D or 3Denvironments), myriad representations, scenarios, and settings arepossible, as would be appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the artwith the benefit of this disclosure.

The following are non-limiting examples of skills that may be used todecompose certain types of computer simulations:

First Person Shooter—an entertainment computer simulation wherein acomputer display renders a point of view as if the user were lookingthrough an avatar's eyes. In competitive computer simulations, firstperson shooters generally require users to shoot at other users' avatarsor other targets using a variety of techniques. Certain first-personshooters allow users to simulate control of a person, a robot, a largerobotic machine, a tank, etc. It should be understood that many dynamicsof a first-person shooter can be modified depending on a current loadout of the user (e.g., the user's equipment and/or weapons). Forexample, different weapons can have different dispersion patterns, anddifferent armor or vehicles can impart different amounts of moment tomovement, etc. The following non-limiting skills are contemplated foruse with skills assessment tests disclosed herein:

-   -   Track—A skill regarding following a target with a crosshair        directed by a user interface device.    -   Peek—The ability of a user to quickly assess and eliminate a        target. The target can be presented after a user's avatar moves        around a corner, over a ledge, etc.    -   Spray—The ability of a user to hit one or more targets in quick        succession. This skill test can gauge a user's ability to        control simulated recoil with a weapon and/or the user's ability        to jump between and/or prioritize amongst multiple targets.    -   Jump—The user's ability to jump between two locations. This can        include jumping while running, crouching, firing, etc.    -   Listen—The user's ability to differentiate within a computer        simulation based on sound (e.g., a location, direction, an        amount of health of a target, etc.).    -   Throw/launch Grenade—The user's ability to throw or launch a        grenade into a designated area in multiple conditions (lengths,        changes of elevation, lighting patterns, etc.).

Racing Simulation—A simulation wherein a user commands a vehicle avatarthat can race against competing users' vehicle avatars. The followingskills and corresponding tests may be altered to account for differencesin avatar vehicle, weather conditions, etc. The following non-limitingskills are contemplated for use with skills assessment tests disclosedherein:

-   -   Gear Changing—an assessment of a user's ability to change gears        at the correct speed, engine RPM, track conditions, etc.    -   Low-speed turning—an assessment of a user's ability to traverse        relatively sharp turns at various speeds and under varying        conditions.    -   High-speed turning—an assessment of a user's ability to traverse        sweeping turns at various speeds and under varying conditions.    -   Racing Line Tracking—an assessment of a user's ability to        maintain course on a predefined racing line, particularly at        turns, which can materially affect a user's overall racing        performance.    -   Drafting—An assessment of a user's ability to maintain a certain        distance behind a competing vehicle and/or to overtake a vehicle        after drafting.    -   Initial Acceleration—An assessment of a user's ability to        accelerate from a stop (e.g., at the beginning of a race).    -   Braking—An assessment of a user's ability to brake under various        conditions (e.g., weather conditions, tire conditions, to a        specified speed, etc.).

Real Time Strategy—a simulation wherein users generally build bases andunits to compete with other users doing the same. The units can includecorresponding weapon systems to destroy enemy units, building,resources, etc. The following non-limiting skills are contemplated foruse with skills assessment tests disclosed herein:

-   -   Target selection—An assessment of a user's ability to select a        specified location/building/unit on a screen.    -   Building shortcuts—An assessment of a user's ability to build a        specified building and/or unit using keyboard shortcuts and/or a        combination of keyboard shortcuts and other inputs.    -   Kiting—An assessment of a user's ability to actively command        units to fire at a target and then move after firing, preferably        out of range of return fire from the target.    -   Unit positioning—An assessment of a user's ability to position a        group of units to optimal effect (e.g., surround ranged units        with melee units, spreading out units susceptible to splash        damage, layering flying units on top of ground units, etc.).    -   Build Order—An assessment of a user's ability to optimally        select and time the order at which buildings are built depending        on various conditions.

Medical Simulation—A simulation wherein a user diagnoses or treats oneor more ailments. This example is included, in part, to explicitly showthat the techniques disclosed herein are not limited to entertainmentsimulation or competitive simulations. The following non-limiting skillsare contemplated for use with skills assessment tests disclosed herein:

-   -   Incision—An assessment of a user's ability to optimally select        an incision location for a specified procedure. The assessment        may include analyzing other associated skills like incision        drainage.    -   Setting a bone—An assessment of a user's ability to correctly        set a bone after a fracture or after a limb is dislocated.    -   Suturing—An assessment of a number of methods of suturing        different types of wounds that may call for different suture        methodologies.    -   Foreign body removal—An assessment of the success of a user's        ability to remove a foreign body of a patient's body, which may        include benign and/or malignant growths, while minimizing injury        and improving a likelihood of recovery for the patient.    -   Applying Medication—An assessment of how well a user administers        medication (e.g., numbing compound) to a patient (e.g.,        subcutaneously, intravenously, etc.).    -   Scan Assessment—An assessment of how accurate a user can read        and identify various anomalies on various types of scans (e.g.,        magnetic resonance imaging (MM), computerized tomography (CAT)        scan, XRAY scan, etc.).    -   CPR—An assessment of a user's ability to perform cardiopulmonary        resuscitation (CPR) under various conditions.

Randomization of Iterative Test

FIG. 4 illustrates a notional sequence 400 of skill assessment tests toillustrate features of the disclosure pertaining to a randomization ofskills assessment tests. As disclosed herein, still assessment tests(sometimes referred to as “baseline tests”) are typically done once (orseldom), they are typically not randomized, are typically the same forall users, and typically measure a starting proficiency. Skill trainingor challenges (both can be referred to as “challenges”) are typicallydone multiple times, they can be randomized as described herein, and maydiffer by users, user groups, or the like, and are often used toperiodically or continually measure proficiency progression. If theskill test were static (i.e., the same test were administered repeatedlyto the user), then the user may be able to memorize the test andtherefore optimize his/her results. This could artificially inflate theuser's proficiency at the skill and not provide meaningful metrics.

To mitigate the risk of a user memorizing a challenge, aspects of thedisclosure pertain to randomizing aspects of subsequent challenges.Illustrated are two sequential collections of challenges, namely a firstsequential collection 402 and a second sequential collection 404, eachof which can be administered to a corresponding user. More sequentialcollections of challenges can benefit from aspects illustrated in FIG. 4as illustrated by ellipsis 406. As illustrated, the first iteration ofeach sequence (e.g., iteration 408 of first sequential collection 402and iteration 410 of second sequential collection 404) can beadministered substantially identically to multiple users (and possiblyacross multiple user devices).

The first nearly identical test (baseline test) can be performed bymultiple users; raw data can be collected based on the performance ofthe users. Raw data can include values for the following non-limitingexamples which may be collected at multiple times for each iteration:

-   -   Time: Time from start of test    -   Tick: Tick number from start of test    -   BotID: Id of the current bot    -   TargetPosX: Target position in X    -   TargetPosY: Target position in Y    -   TargetPosZ: Target position in Z    -   DistanceWithUser: Distance between target and user    -   IsDucking: True if target was ducking    -   UserEyeVectorX: The X coordinate of the vector from the user eye        to where he/she is aiming    -   UserEyeVectorY: The Y coordinate of the vector from the user eye        to where he/she is aiming    -   UserEyeVectorZ: The Z coordinate of the vector from the user eye        to where he/she is aiming    -   PerfectEyeVectorX: The X coordinate of the vector from the user        eye to where the middle of the head of the target is    -   PerfectEyeVectorY: The Y coordinate of the vector from the user        eye to where the middle of the head of the target is    -   PerfectEyeVectorZ: The Z coordinate of the vector from the user        eye to where the middle of the head of the target is    -   UserAngle1: Pitch angle of user's reticle    -   UserAngle2: Yaw angle of user's reticle    -   UserAngle3: Roll angle of user's reticle    -   PerfectAngle1: Perfect pitch angle to aim for the center of the        head of the target    -   PerfectAngle2: Perfect yaw angle to aim for the center of the        head of the target    -   PerfectAngle3: Perfect roll angle to aim for the center of the        head of the target    -   InFOV: True if target can be seen by user    -   OnTarget: True if user is aiming at the target (any part of the        body)    -   BodyPart: Body part on which the user is aiming at    -   DegreesError: Degrees error between user angle and perfect angle    -   DistanceError: Interpolate distance error between user angle and        perfect angle on the screen (directly linked to degrees error)    -   TargetHealth: Target current health    -   BulletShots: Number of bullet shots until now    -   Damage: Damage done at this tick    -   HitGroup: Part of the body that was hit    -   Latency: Current latency

The values of the raw data can be digested and used to determine variousaspects. For example, the raw data can be analyzed or otherwise used todetermine which values of raw data correlate to a successful score at askill assessment test and/or in what proportion/permutation. In otherwords, the raw data can be collected across multiple non-randomizedchallenge iterations collected from a large group of users. The userscan be ranked based on a metric, such as a ranking or score on acomputer simulation (e.g., kill/death ratio, # of kills, etc.), or ascore on a skill test (e.g., a number of targets hit), and/or bycomparing values of metrics between users and ranking them.

It should be understood that the baseline test can be segregated basedon general skill level such that the baseline test can be differentbetween groups of users but common within a group. For example, a userbase can be segregated into beginner, intermediate, and expert skilllevel groups and the same baseline test iteration administered withinthe same group. Other methods of user binning or classifications arepossible, as would be appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the artwith the benefit of this disclosure.

As opposed to the baseline test, a subsequent iteration of the test(e.g., the challenges) can be randomized between users such that adifferent test is provided to each user, even within a skill group. Forexample, as illustrated, subsequent test iteration 412 of firstsequential collection 402 and subsequent test iteration 414 of secondsequential collection 404 are substantially different (e.g., locationsof targets being entered and/or a time at which certain targets appearcan be altered between tests). The subsequent iterations of testsassessing a same skill can be randomized over time as the test isadministered through multiple iterations. The randomization of thetests, as disclosed herein, prevents users from memorizing a test andoverly exaggerating a score beyond a user's skill level. It should beunderstood that many multiple iterations can be administered, eachrandomized to a degree as represented by ellipsis 416.

The randomization described herein does not necessarily mean that alltests are unique, but the level of randomization focuses on testsadministered to a single user being randomized over iterations. Thus, itis possible that a test is identical across users for a certainiteration but is randomized for a single user between iterations of thetest. Furthermore, the randomization focuses on aspects of the test thatdo not alter a level of difficulty of the test. For example, a locationand/or pathing of a target from a shooting test may be randomized, but asize or a speed of a target may not be randomized. Otherwise, aspects ofthe test may be randomized within bounds to maintain the general skilllevel of a test while still providing statistically significant metricsindicative of a level of proliferation for a test or computersimulation.

Features can be composed from the raw data. Non-limiting examples offeatures can include:

-   -   TotalTime: Time (in seconds) during which the user had a moving        target in his/her field of view.    -   OnTargetTime: Time (in seconds) during which the user was on a        target    -   OnTargetPercentage: Percentage (between 0 and 100) of time the        player was aiming at the center of the target.

Features can provide values of metrics that may be directly indicativeof a user's proficiency at a skill or a computer simulation. Thefeatures can be defined via one or more rules that may be defined and/orgenerated by a processor. Techniques pertaining to machine learning canbe used to digest data including, but not limited to:

-   -   1. Determining decomposition rules from raw data to features;    -   2. Determining rules pertaining to which features and/or raw        data values are indicative of a user's proficiency at a skill or        a computer simulation;    -   3. Building models from the data that predict the skill        improvements while training the specific skill;    -   4. Determining rules that correlate a user's performance at a        plurality of skills assessment tests to the user's performance        at a computer simulation; and    -   5. Determining rules to optimize the performance of a team        including role composition.

FIG. 5 illustrates a flowchart 500 that illustrates features of thedisclosure pertaining to implementing a skills based assessment test todetermine a level of proficiency of a user at a computer simulation. At502, a plurality of skill assessment tests can be generated for a userwherein each of the plurality of skill assessments can test a skill foruse in the computer simulation. As disclosed herein, various rules andmethodology can be used to score the user at the plurality of skillassessment tests. The skill assessment tests can be administered to theuser via a user computer device (e.g., local PC client 234), a displaydevice, and a user interface device.

At 504, metrics can be collected from the user at a server device. Theserver device can be server 525, for example. The server device can beconnected to a plurality of user devices, each administering respectiveskill assessment test(s). As disclosed herein, the skill assessment testcan be provided as a baseline test across the multiple devices for thefirst iteration and subsequent iterations can be randomized. In certainembodiments, the server may collect metrics from a plurality of usersthat may share a common user device. For example, two friends maycomplete the tests on the same user computer device.

The metrics can be used to determine a level of proficiency of a user ateach of the skills represented by the skill assessment test(s) and/orfor the computer simulation as a whole. The metrics can include valuesfor raw data and/or features in any combination. In certain embodiments,raw data may be collected for a first instance (such as a baseline runof a test) and subsequent metrics can be featured. The values of the rawdata can be used to tailor or select rules for determining values offeatures determined from the raw values. The value of features can becalculated on a user computer device to save bandwidth and storage spaceat a server device.

At 506, the server device can collect metrics from a plurality of skillassessment tests. The metrics from the plurality of tests are importantto determine and process rules associated with determining a level ofproficiency of an individual user. The server can process the metricsusing machine learning or other techniques to determine a level ofproficiency of an individual user at an individual skill or at acomputer simulation. The metrics from the plurality of skill assessmenttests are useful for providing a large enough set of data to find andcharacterize statistically significant interdependencies using thedisclosed techniques. Furthermore, the server device may be incommunication with other computer devices which may provide independentranking or performance information that may be used to supportsupervised training of machine learning models, for example.

At 508, an individual user's metrics can be compared, via one or morerules, to the metrics collected from a plurality of tests/users can beused to determine a level of proficiency of the user at the computersimulation as a whole. As disclosed herein, the level of proficiency ofthe user at the computer simulation can be determined through the use ofmachine learning constructs that can be trained using data collectedfrom a relatively large data set of metrics from a plurality of userseach performing the plurality of skill assessment tests.

The individual metrics can also be used to determine a level ofproficiency of the user at a specific role that may be used in thecomputer simulation. As disclosed herein, the user's relativeproficiency at certain ones of the individual skills may indicate thatthe user is suited (e.g., suitably proficient) at a role for use in thecomputer simulation. The role can be a member of a team that includesmultiple team members, each with a proficiency at a complementary role.The techniques disclosed herein can be used for determining which skillscorrelate to a level of proficiency of a user at a role, which roles arecomplementary, etc.

In certain embodiments, a skill assessment for a user can be performedfor a user operating a computer simulation (e.g., performing complexskills). For example, raw data values and/or feature values can berecorded while the user is operating a computer simulation as opposed toa computer skill assessment. The values for raw data and/or complexskills can be recorded and used to verify or improve the assessment ofthe user's proficiency based on the computer assessment skill tests,improve rules for determining a user's proficiency, etc. The disclosedtechniques can be used to gather these values for a group of users suchthat statistically significant information pertaining to the user basefor the computer simulation can be obtained and processed using thedisclosed techniques.

The disclosed techniques can be used in conjunction with various optionswithin a computer simulation. For example, data and/or features can beoption-specific and/or used to determine which options would be suitablefor a user. For example, a sensitivity setting for a user interfacedevice can be suggested to improve accuracy, jumping etc. This can bedetermined by, for example, determining that an individual user's inputcommands and resulting actions on the screen indicate that a user'ssensitivity settings are not aligned with a successful user's settings(which can be similarly determined). Additional options can includerecommending certain virtual weapons, armory, inventory, etc. to matchthe user's skill set. In certain embodiments, these options can bespecific to a specific iteration of a computer simulation (e.g., acertain map, game type, etc.).

In further embodiments, results can be merged to individual skills (dualor multi-tasking) to bridge the simplicity of a skill with thecomplexity of a full game. In further embodiments, models can beenriched with new data sources outside of the present software describedherein, including match data, public profile data, wearable sensors,peripheral devices, etc. In some cases, match making based on thevarious metrics described above can be used for more balanced matches.One of ordinary skill in the art with the benefit of this disclosurewould appreciate the many modifications, variations, and alternativeembodiments thereof.

In some embodiments, the user computer device and the server computerare a same device. The computer simulation and the plurality of skillassessment tests may use a same engine to generate content of thecomputer simulation and the plurality of skill assessment tests. Thecomputer simulation may be a network-enabled computer simulation whereinmultiple users compete against each other in real time. In some cases,the determining the level of proficiency of the user at the computersimulation includes comparing a ranking of the user at the computersimulation to ranking of other users of the computer simulation, whereinthe rankings are determined through metrics other than metricsindicative of users' performance at the plurality of skill assessmenttests. In certain embodiments, flowchart 500 can further include:collecting individual results for the user at each of the plurality ofskill assessment tests; and determining, based on the results of theuser at the each of the plurality of skill assessment tests, a rolesuited to the user for the computer simulation. Flowchart 500 can alsoinclude displaying, to other users of the computer simulation, the roleof the user, and displaying, to other users of the computer simulation,a representation of the user's individual results at the each of theplurality of skill assessment tests. In some aspects, flowchart 500 caninclude displaying, to the user, a representation of the user's level ofproficiency at the computer simulation based on the comparison of themetrics indicative of the user's performance to the additional users'metrics.

FIG. 6 is a simplified flow chart 600 showing aspects of a method formatching users of a computer simulation by role, according to certainembodiments. Flow chart 600 can be performed by processing logic thatmay comprise hardware (circuitry, dedicated logic, etc.), softwareoperating on appropriate hardware (such as a general purpose computingsystem or a dedicated machine), firmware (embedded software), or anycombination thereof. In certain embodiments, flowchart 600 can beperformed by aspects of FIGS. 1, 2, or a combination thereof.

At operation 610, flow chart 600 can include, at a server deviceincluding a server network interface, receiving, from a user device, viathe server network interface, metrics indicative of a user's performanceat a plurality of skills of the computer simulation, according tocertain embodiments.

At operation 620, flow chart 600 can include determining, at the serverdevice, based on the metrics, a suitable role for the user for thecomputer simulation, according to certain embodiments.

At operation 630, flow chart 600 can include receiving, at the server, arequest from the user device, a request for the user to join a team foran instantiation of the computer simulation wherein the team includesmultiple users interacting via the computer simulation, according tocertain embodiments.

At operation 640, flow chart 600 can include determining, at the server,based on the role of the user, whether the user should join the team,according to certain embodiments.

In some embodiments, the suitable role can be determined based on acomparison of the metrics with corresponding metrics of other usersindicative of the other users' performance at the plurality of skills ofthe computer simulation. The metrics can be determined through aplurality of skill assessment tests performed on a user device orthrough an analysis of the user operating the computer simulation. Insome cases, the role can be determined based on a determination, viaanalysis of the metrics, that the user is proficient at a certain subsetof the plurality of skills. In certain embodiments, the determiningwhether the user should join the team is further based on adetermination that the user has a relative level of proficiency at therole corresponding to other members of the team's proficiency at theirrespective roles. The relative levels of proficiency of the user at therole may be determined by comparing, via the metrics, the user'sproficiency at a subset of the plurality of skills versus other users'proficiency at the subset of the plurality of skills. In some case, thedetermination that the user has the relative level of proficiency at therole corresponding to the other members of the team's proficiency attheir respective roles can include determining that each member of theteam has a corresponding rank in their respective role wherein the rankis determined by comparing the each team member's proficiency at theplurality of skills to other users of the computer simulation'sproficiency at the plurality of skills.

It should be appreciated that the specific steps illustrated in the flowchart 600 of FIG. 6 provide a particular method for matching users of acomputer simulation by role, according to certain embodiments. Othersequences of steps may also be performed according to alternativeembodiments. Furthermore, additional steps may be added or removeddepending on the particular applications. Any combination of changes canbe used and one of ordinary skill in the art with the benefit of thisdisclosure would understand the many variations, modifications, andalternative embodiments thereof.

FIG. 7 is a simplified flow chart 700 showing aspects of a method fordetermining a proficiency of a plurality of users at a computersimulation, according to certain embodiments. Flow chart 700 can beperformed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (circuitry,dedicated logic, etc.), software operating on appropriate hardware (suchas a general purpose computing system or a dedicated machine), firmware(embedded software), or any combination thereof. In certain embodiments,flowchart 700 can be performed by aspects of FIGS. 1, 2, or acombination thereof.

At operation 710, flow chart 700 can include providing, to each of theplurality of users via a respective computer device, one of a pluralityof skill assessment tests, wherein: each of the plurality of skillassessment tests is configured to test a respective skill for use in thecomputer simulation; a first iteration of the one of the plurality ofskill assessment tests is common for each of the plurality of users; anda subsequent iteration of the one of the plurality of skill assessmenttests is randomized such that the subsequent iteration of the one of theplurality of skill assessment tests is different for each of theplurality of users but still tests the proficiency of the plurality ofusers at a skill corresponding to the one of the plurality of skillassessment tests, according to certain embodiments.

At operation 720, flow chart 700 can include collecting, at a serverdevice, metrics indicative of performance of the plurality of users forthe first iteration and the subsequent iteration at the one of theplurality of skills, according to certain embodiments.

At operation 730, flow chart 700 can include determining, at a servicedevice, a relative proficiency for each of the plurality of users at theone of the plurality of skill assessment tests, according to certainembodiments.

In some embodiments, the plurality of skill assessment tests may beadministered to the user via a user device including an input device anda display device. In some cases, the randomized subsequent iteration ofthe one of the plurality of skill assessment tests includes a renderedobject that is randomized with respect to at least one of a location ora time that the rendered object appears on the display device. In somecases, an amount of randomization applied to the rendered object isselected based on a current level of proficiency of the user at the oneof the plurality of skills. The metrics can include data generatedcorresponding to a status of the input device as the user operates theinput device in response to the randomized rendered object. In certainembodiments, the metrics are organized into features, wherein each ofthe features includes a quantitative value corresponding to one or moreof the metrics and quantitative values for the features are used todetermine a level of proficiency of the plurality of users at the one ofthe plurality of skill assessment tests instead of all of the metrics.In some embodiments, each of the plurality of skill assessment tests isadministered to the plurality of users as a corresponding first commonbaseline test and a corresponding subsequent randomized test. In somecases, each of the plurality of skill assessment tests is configured toassess a user's proficiency at a task that is performed as part of thecomputer simulation.

It should be appreciated that the specific steps illustrated in flowchart 700 of FIG. 7 provide a particular method for determining aproficiency of a plurality of users at a computer simulation, accordingto certain embodiments. Other sequences of steps may also be performedaccording to alternative embodiments. Furthermore, additional steps maybe added or removed depending on the particular applications. Anycombination of changes can be used and one of ordinary skill in the artwith the benefit of this disclosure would understand the manyvariations, modifications, and alternative embodiments thereof.

As used in this specification, any formulation used of the style “atleast one of A, B or C,” and the formulation “at least one of A, B andC” use a disjunctive “or” and a disjunctive “and” such that thoseformulations comprise any and all joint and several permutations of A,B, C, that is, A alone, B alone, C alone, A and B in any order, A and Cin any order, B and C in any order and A, B, C in any order. There maybe more or less than three features used in such formulations.

In the claims, any reference signs placed between parentheses shall notbe construed as limiting the claim. The word “comprising” does notexclude the presence of other elements or steps then those listed in aclaim. Furthermore, the terms “a” or “an,” as used herein, are definedas one or more than one. Also, the use of introductory phrases such as“at least one” and “one or more” in the claims should not be construedto imply that the introduction of another claim element by theindefinite articles “a” or “an” limits any particular claim containingsuch introduced claim element to inventions containing only one suchelement, even when the same claim includes the introductory phrases “oneor more” or “at least one” and indefinite articles such as “a” or “an.”The same holds true for the use of definite articles. Unless statedotherwise, terms such as “first” and “second” are used to arbitrarilydistinguish between the elements such terms describe. Thus, these termsare not necessarily intended to indicate temporal or otherprioritization of such elements. The mere fact that certain measures arerecited in mutually different claims does not indicate that acombination of these measures cannot be used to advantage.

Unless otherwise explicitly stated as incompatible, or the physics orotherwise of the embodiments, examples or claims prevent such acombination, the features of the foregoing embodiments and examples, andof the following claims may be integrated together in any suitablearrangement, especially ones where there is a beneficial effect in doingso. This is not limited to only any specified benefit, and instead mayarise from an “ex post facto” benefit. This is to say that thecombination of features is not limited by the described forms,particularly the form (e.g. numbering) of the example(s), embodiment(s),or dependency of the claim(s). Moreover, this also applies to the phrase“in one embodiment,” “according to an embodiment” and the like, whichare merely a stylistic form of wording and are not to be construed aslimiting the following features to a separate embodiment to all otherinstances of the same or similar wording. This is to say, a reference to“an”, “one” or “some” embodiment(s) may be a reference to any one ormore, and/or all embodiments, or combination(s) thereof, disclosed.Also, similarly, the reference to “the” embodiment may not be limited tothe immediately preceding embodiment.

Certain figures in this specification are flow charts illustratingmethods and systems. It will be understood that each block of these flowcharts, and combinations of blocks in these flow charts, may beimplemented by computer program instructions. These computer programinstructions may be loaded onto a computer or other programmableapparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions which executeon the computer or other programmable apparatus create structures forimplementing the functions specified in the flow chart block or blocks.These computer program instructions may also be stored in acomputer-readable memory that can direct a computer or otherprogrammable apparatus to function in a particular manner, such that theinstructions stored in the computer-readable memory produce an articleof manufacture including instruction structures which implement thefunction specified in the flow chart block or blocks. The computerprogram instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or otherprogrammable apparatus to cause a series of operational steps to beperformed on the computer or other programmable apparatus to produce acomputer implemented process such that the instructions which execute onthe computer or other programmable apparatus provide steps forimplementing the functions specified in the flow chart block or blocks.Accordingly, blocks of the flow charts support combinations ofstructures for performing the specified functions and combinations ofsteps for performing the specified functions. It will also be understoodthat each block of the flow charts, and combinations of blocks in theflow charts, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedcomputer systems which perform the specified functions or steps, orcombinations of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.

For example, any number of computer programming languages, such as C,C++, C# (CSharp), Perl, Ada, Python, Pascal, SmallTalk, FORTRAN,assembly language, and the like, may be used to implement machineinstructions. Further, various programming approaches such asprocedural, object-oriented or artificial intelligence techniques may beemployed, depending on the requirements of each particularimplementation. Compiler programs and/or virtual machine programsexecuted by computer systems generally translate higher levelprogramming languages to generate sets of machine instructions that maybe executed by one or more processors to perform a programmed functionor set of function.

The foregoing description of one or more implementations providesillustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive or tolimit the scope of the invention to the precise form disclosed.Modifications and variations are possible in light of the aboveteachings or may be acquired from practice of various implementations ofthe present disclosure.

What is claimed is:
 1. A server device for skills-based simulation gametraining, the server device comprising: a server network interface; andone or more server processors coupled to the server network interface,the one or more server processors configured to: receive, via the servernetwork interface, from a user device, metrics indicative of a user'sperformance at a plurality of skill assessment tests for use in acomputer simulation; receive, via the server network interface, fromadditional user devices, additional metrics indicative of additionalusers' performance at the plurality of skill assessment tests; comparethe metrics from the user device with the additional metrics from theadditional user devices; determine, based on a comparison of the metricsfrom the user device with the additional metrics from the additionaluser devices, score data indicative of a level of proficiency of theuser of the user device at the computer simulation; and transmit, viathe server network interface, the data indicative of the level ofproficiency of the user to the user device.
 2. The server device forskills-based simulation game training of claim 1, wherein each of theplurality of skill assessment tests is configured to assess a user'sproficiency at a task that is performed as part of the computersimulation.
 3. A method for determining a proficiency of a user at acomputer simulation, the method comprising: providing, to the user, viaa user computer device including an input interface and a display, aplurality of skill assessment tests wherein each of the plurality ofskill assessment tests is configured to test a respective skill for usein the computer simulation; receiving, at a server computer device, fromthe user computer device, metrics indicative of the user's performanceat the plurality of skill assessment test; collecting, at the servercomputer, additional metrics indicative of additional users' performanceat the plurality of skill assessment tests wherein each of theadditional users perform the plurality of skill assessment tests at acomputer device; and determining, based on a comparison of the metricsindicative of the user's performance to the additional users' metrics, alevel of proficiency of the user at the computer simulation.
 4. Themethod for determining a proficiency of a user at a computer simulationof claim 3, wherein the user computer device and the server computer area same device.
 5. The method for determining a proficiency of a user ata computer simulation of claim 3, wherein the computer simulation andthe plurality of skill assessment tests use a same engine to generatecontent of the computer simulation and the plurality of skill assessmenttests.
 6. The method for determining a proficiency of a user at acomputer simulation of claim 3, wherein the computer simulation is anetwork-enabled computer simulation wherein multiple users competeagainst each other in real time.
 7. The method for determining aproficiency of a user at a computer simulation of claim 6, wherein thedetermining the level of proficiency of the user at the computersimulation includes comparing a ranking of the user at the computersimulation to ranking of other users of the computer simulation, whereinthe rankings are determined through metrics other than metricsindicative of users' performance at the plurality of skill assessmenttests.
 8. The method for determining a proficiency of a user at acomputer simulation of claim 3, further comprising: collectingindividual results for the user at each of the plurality of skillassessment tests; and determining, based on the results of the user atthe each of the plurality of skill assessment tests, a role suited tothe user for the computer simulation.
 9. The method for determining aproficiency of a user at a computer simulation of claim 8, furthercomprising displaying, to other users of the computer simulation, therole of the user.
 10. The method for determining a proficiency of a userat a computer simulation of claim 8, further comprising displaying, toother users of the computer simulation, a representation of the user'sindividual results at the each of the plurality of skill assessmenttests.
 11. The method for determining a proficiency of a user at acomputer simulation of claim 3, further comprising displaying, to theuser, a representation of the user's level of proficiency at thecomputer simulation based on the comparison of the metrics indicative ofthe user's performance to the additional users' metrics.
 12. A systemfor determining a proficiency of a user at a computer simulation, thesystem comprising: a server computer device including one or more serverprocessors, the one or more server processors configured to: receive,from a user computer device, metrics indicative of the user'sperformance at a plurality of skill assessment tests configured to testa respective skill for use in the computer simulation; collectadditional metrics indicative of additional users' performance at theplurality of skill assessment tests wherein each of the additional usersperform the plurality of skill assessment tests at a computer device;and determine, based on a comparison of the metrics indicative of theuser's performance to the additional users' metrics, a level ofproficiency of the user at the computer simulation.
 13. The system fordetermining a proficiency of a user at a computer simulation of claim12, wherein the user computer device and the server computer are a samedevice.
 14. The system for determining a proficiency of a user at acomputer simulation of claim 12, wherein the computer simulation and theplurality of skill assessment tests use a same engine to generatecontent of the computer simulation and the plurality of skill assessmenttest.
 15. The system for determining a proficiency of a user at acomputer simulation of claim 12, wherein the computer simulation is anetwork-enabled computer simulation wherein multiple users competeagainst each other in real time.
 16. The system for determining aproficiency of a user at a computer simulation of claim 15, wherein thedetermining the level of proficiency of the user at the computersimulation includes comparing a ranking of the user at the computersimulation to ranking of other users of the computer simulation, whereinthe rankings are determined through metrics other than metricsindicative of users' performance at the plurality of skill assessmenttests.
 17. The system for determining a proficiency of a user at acomputer simulation of claim 12, wherein the one or more serverprocessors or the one or more user processors are configured to: collectindividual results for the user at each of the plurality of skillassessment tests; and determine, based on the results of the user at theeach of the plurality of skill assessment tests, a role suited to theuser for the computer simulation.
 18. The system for determining aproficiency of a user at a computer simulation of claim 17, wherein theone or more server processors or the one or more user processors areconfigured to display, to other users of the computer simulation, therole of the user.
 19. The system for determining a proficiency of a userat a computer simulation of claim 17, wherein the one or more serverprocessors or the one or more user processors are configured to display,to other users of the computer simulation, a representation of theuser's individual results at the each of the plurality of skillassessment tests.
 20. The system for determining a proficiency of a userat a computer simulation of claim 12, wherein the one or more serverprocessors or the one or more user processors are configured to display,to the user, a representation of the user's level of proficiency at thecomputer simulation based on the comparison of the metrics indicative ofthe user's performance to the additional users' metrics.